Nuggy – In fact they very seldom overtly say that any more. They almost always say “alleged” in order to cover their arses against litigation. Occasionally they forget and have to be reminded by the interviewer, who is also scared sh*tless of being sued or sacked.

I agree with your second part, and it smacks of double-standards. Sadly, I stopped being amazed by politicians’ double standards many years ago. Actually that’s not quite true, Blair still manages to amaze me!

Tom – Actually it was back in only a few minutes. It was also the whole site that was down, not just that page, as you would have known if you had checked. I asked “Is it simply traffic overload, or is it being ‘updated’ by the LibDem organisation?” but apparently you chose the explanation you preferred.

I did and it was. I went to the root http://www.libdemvoice.org and it timed out. Well, isn’t that a puzzle! I guess we can’t know which was the correct explanation…… except that they didn’t change or remove that page, so the real explanation is pretty obvious!

Ah… You just edited your reply (I guess that’s your privilege!). Apparently some stupid people like Mrs Fawkes rely on you for their news, so maybe for their sake you should check your stories a little better!

It teaches me the depths to which the hypocrisy of some people can go, so in that sense it’s good. Still at least I can say I only voted for him and New Labour once, before I realised my mistake. How about you?

Honest question Tom… Do you like the majority of posts being from only a few people, many of which are just tit-for-tat drivel, or do you prefer a wider and more intelligent discussion? Or is it irrelevant to you? Obviously you have no traffic-driven advertising revenue, so what’s your motivation?

[I don’t mind. I don’t mind criticism either. And you’re quite right, I get no benefit from traffic. Free speech is my motivation. It’s a good one]- Tom

Ms Fawkes – Tom knows, as you clearly do not, that blocking a given person on a site such as this is far easier said than done. I suspect Tom also knows that all he has to do is ask me to post no more…

You think the SNP is none too popular in Scotland? Are you kidding? How do you explain the fact that we have an SNP majority government in the Scottish Parliament, and with a PR election system too? You don’t let your stupidity get in the way of your opinions, do you?

Why do you think I listed them both, moron?
I think anyone from Scotland who is reading this blogg and considers you to be a member of joining the SNP party would probably think again, your obnoxious and offensive, but I don’t think for one minute that you are an SNP member.

Well thank you for your analysis of Scottish politics! It’s a shame it’s such complete b*llocks! At least you’re persistent. You plainly don’t have the faintest idea what you’re talking about on just about any subject, but you keep on coming out with yet more drivel!

I know enough to know a charlatan, a tory one which you so obviously are. The only way the scots will get enough votes to gain independence will be if the vote is rigged.
The tories have been in exile for a long time in Scotland and you had nowhere to go other than the nationalists.

First you said there is now more competition from UKIP in Scotland, and then that there is nowhere for a Tory to go other than the SNP? I have to say it’s unusual for someone to hold two completely opposite views at the same time, both of which bear no relation to reality.

Don’t you find that thinking and talking about reality is more fulfilling than just saying the first ridiculous thing that comes into your head? I’m not very interested in your political pronouncements, because they obviously only range from the irrational to the completely bizarre. I’m more interested in why you feel the need to say things which even you don’t believe. Why do you?

There is more competition but none that he tory would be interested in, they only side with majority parties – after September SNP may not be the majority party and the tories in Scotland will revert back to type and their own party once again.

I have never come across anyone like you before! You construct and reconstruct weird ‘rationales’ to explain to yourself how all the things you said before are some kind of coherent whole. You didn’t answer my question…

weird only in your mind, you are the one that constructs irrational, insulting remarks against those that oppose you, even when proved wrong their is no deconstruction nor apology from you, yet you demand it from others.
I refuse to answer any more of your ridiculous questions which you seem to be perfectly capable of asking then answering yourself.
Try reading over your own posts to find irrational behaviour.

I have learned nothing from you that I did not already know or want to know, most of what you say goes Whoosh, but it shows you for up for the nasty person you are most of the time, the odd time you tilt in a good direction, hence “the answer MY FRIEND is blowing in the wind”. The same probably applies to your political affiliations too.

My mistake, you haven’t learned anything yet today! I will explain. The phrase “tilting at windmills” comes from a classic book entitled “Don Quixote” by Miguel de Cervantes. In this phrase the word tilting means in the old jousting sense, not sloping or leaning. The idiom means attacking imaginary giant enemies.

I know perfectly well that most of what I say goes “whoosh” for you, which is why I said it. You obviously have no idea what whoosh means, otherwise you wouldn’t have just agreed that most of what I say does so…… so that went whoosh too! Just Google it…….

You can’t help yourself from displaying can you, like some demented peacock. If you read the link it explains everything that you have just printed dumb dumb. As for whoosh I will use my own definition, like I did regarding persuasion, so to me whoosh is “just to let anything you say go over my head”.
As for the definition of “tilt” to you and your one track mind there may only be one definition but I think you will find there is one applicable to my description of what a windmill does also.

Are you still trying to pretend that you had ever heard of Don Quixote before you wrote “your moods tilt with the windmills”? The truth is that you were trying to use what you though was a clever reference you had heard somewhere, but you had no idea what it actually was or what it meant. Your attempts at justifying your silly pronouncements (about this, Scottish party politics and so much more) after you’ve written them are transparent and childish.

I did not say I had read Don Quixote, nor is it something I would wish to read quite frankly, but the reference to “tilt at windmills” and it’s connotations I knew all about prior to my remark about “tilting with windmills”, which was my own version and interpretation i’m afraid, a unique reference for an oddball who thinks he knows everything and whose mood and opinion changes with the wind.

I can’t for the life of me think why I need to explain anything to you, but tilting at windmills is encapsulated in a poem, I forget which one before you ask.

Oh yes, that old poem which you conveniently can’t remember (and nor can anyone else, because it doesn’t exist). Yet another transparently false justification!

I would never condemn anybody for not having read a certain book, because nobody can read everything. However, I DO condemn you for saying that you wouldn’t wish to read a book which is regarded as one of the greatest works of fiction ever published. What a sad, closed mind you must have.

Hey clever cloggs , anyone can sit on a computer and gather info on any given subject, my knowledge is my own and probably outweighs your fictitious characters and claptrap.
As I am a woman, women’s classics should be more my thing but I think they are overrated too.

Of course I could have just used Google, but the truth is that I read Don Quixote 30+ years ago and enjoyed it as very a good read, as well as it being thought-provoking. It’s a great book no matter what your sex. Some people have even rated it as the best novel of all time. I just find it so sad that you don’t seem interested in anything other than trying (and failing) to defend your old prejudices.

Here’s a deal for you… If you will recommend one book which you think is brilliant and might teach me something, then I will do the same for you (don’t worry, it won’t be Don Quixote). What do you think?

The Beano! How about “The catcher in the Rye” that should suit you but not me, It is a fact that I am a woman and that I like to read things that interest me, that is not being prejudice, that is a natural predisposition.
I do not intend to reel off lists of books for your mirth whatever I list, but I will say I find most of the classical writers dull and boring and fictional books more so with the odd exception.

I only asked for one book, and not necessarily fictional. And it is NOT for my mirth. If you recommend a book which you think is brilliant then I guarantee that I will read it, and if you like you can ask me questions later to confirm it. Can you do that rather than suggesting a comic (though a good one!), or a book which you don’t even like.

Obviously men like to read things which interest them too. You don’t know my sex, so sexist comments tend to fall rather flat. I think your sex (or marital status) is irrelevant, except when you make an issue about it!

The same could be said with regards to your sex or sexual orientation, but you made quite an issue about both by being evasive.
I refuse to disclose what I read because my personal profile I keep to myself especially when others are being so elusive.
There is a book I found interesting which relates to a person from your neck of the woods(if you are scottish) and Is something I read while studying, it is about Jenny Lee and her life, especially her time with Nye Bevan when he was responsible for setting up the NHS and the trials and tribulations he had to go through.
Jennie Lee a life by Patricia Hollis.
I like books that are inspirational not aspirational.

Thank you for your book suggestion (and for disclosing what you read!) I have never read it, so I will buy it and read it soon. You don’t seem very interested in my book suggestion. It’s not a problem if you’re not – Are you?

I am certainly evasive about my sex and sexuality – BECAUSE THEY ARE IRRELEVANT!!! Do you also think I’m being evasive about the colour of my skin?

I note that you no longer say “sexual persuasion”. That’s an improvement.

Some simple honesty from you might not go amiss. If you’re not interested in my book suggestions then please just say so honestly. If you want to hear it then please say that instead. In any case I will still read your suggestion. In fact I’ve already ordered it from Amazon.

Your real problem is with honesty. You are totally anonymous on here, so it makes no difference at all what you say, and you STILL can’t manage to simply speak your mind. Why is that such a problem for you? If you think you know what my sex, sexuality and skin colour are, then why don’t you have the basic integrity to simply say what you think they are, and why?

It’s clear that you’re not interested in anybody else’s opinion (the fact that you NEVER ask an open question proves that), or of quality of opinion, so the book I would suggest is “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”. You might understand something about quality and your own Phaedrus… or maybe a book more on your level and with some lessons for you is “A Day’s Work” by Eve Bunting.

Yes, I did notice that you changed back to saying “sexual persuasion”. That useless petulance is what children do.

No! orientation was a slip of the tongue, thanks for the book titles I will remember not to read them.
I choose my own literature or literature FRIENDS not foes sorry fools recommend.
How are you infilling comments where there is no reply button?

If I were to tell you that I’m female, heterosexual and black, or male, bisexual and white, would that make any difference to my opinions? No, of course not… BECAUSE IT’S IRRELEVANT TO ANYBODY EXCEPT SEXISTS AND RACISTS!!! Which are you, or are you both?

I have never asked you to tell me your sex, sexuality or race, though you have been VERY keen to tell me many times what your sex and marital status are, though strangely not your skin colour. I wonder therefore who actually has the problem?

i NEVER told you what my sex was and the only reason I mentioned my sexuality and that I was a Mrs was because you referred to me as ms and to annoy me you carried on doing so..
Sorry but honesty is certainly not your strong point, so I think I will refrain from your pontificating of what I am or am not, until you state honestly who you are in detail, but I don’t expect an honest answer anyway so that will let you off the hook from replying to me.

Apparently you are saying that you might be male or female, but you want to be called “Mrs.” because of your sexuality. That’s absolutely OK, what you want to be called on this web site is entirely up to you, and your sexuality is none of my business. I will try not to forget, and I don’t think I ever will now!

I think you have confused overburdenddonkey too. He refers to you with “she” and “her”. What on earth did you say to him?

On this web site I am simply what my opinions show me to be, no more and no less, and my opinions are honest (except sometimes there’s a little sarcasm!).

P.S. Using the title “Mrs.” if you are male can cause some legal problems in the UK. You might want to look into that.

My moniker is Guy Fawkes so no need to use any of the precursory titles but I think you can forget replying to me again.
I have answered your colour question and as for OBD referring to me as a she or a her that is because I was born as such, although I do have male couples who are friends and one refers to the other as she even though biologically he is a he.
this is my final contribution to your idiotic, idiosyncratic conversation.